Talk:Timeline: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (Robot: Unlinking "Category:Timeline") |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Proposed deletion== | ==Proposed deletion== | ||
As the lead notes, there's already: | As the lead notes, there's already: :category:timeline which does the same thing, and more completely. Or, if you don't like that, how about [[:category:centuries]]. This "article" adds nothing in terms of explanatory text, and it's not even written in an in-universe style. There's really no need for this redundancy whatsoever. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 21:54, February 5, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Just noticed those categories aren't well organized. So I see the need for this page: people are being lazy. If instead they organzied the category page and put some explanatory text at the top, it'd be fine, and the wiki would be cleaner. Still think this page should go. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 21:56, February 5, 2010 (UTC) | :Just noticed those categories aren't well organized. So I see the need for this page: people are being lazy. If instead they organzied the category page and put some explanatory text at the top, it'd be fine, and the wiki would be cleaner. Still think this page should go. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 21:56, February 5, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::Eh, okay, I get the point. If you really want to have an ordered list using cardinal numbers you do in fact have to make a page for it. Still, it's such an empty effort, it hardly seems worth the time. Still needs to be rewritten so as not to be so obviously out-of-universe. Objection withdrawn. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 22:01, February 5, 2010 (UTC) | :::Eh, okay, I get the point. If you really want to have an ordered list using cardinal numbers you do in fact have to make a page for it. Still, it's such an empty effort, it hardly seems worth the time. Still needs to be rewritten so as not to be so obviously out-of-universe. Objection withdrawn. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 22:01, February 5, 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:48, 27 April 2013
Proposed deletion
As the lead notes, there's already: :category:timeline which does the same thing, and more completely. Or, if you don't like that, how about category:centuries. This "article" adds nothing in terms of explanatory text, and it's not even written in an in-universe style. There's really no need for this redundancy whatsoever. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 21:54, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Just noticed those categories aren't well organized. So I see the need for this page: people are being lazy. If instead they organzied the category page and put some explanatory text at the top, it'd be fine, and the wiki would be cleaner. Still think this page should go. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 21:56, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Eh, okay, I get the point. If you really want to have an ordered list using cardinal numbers you do in fact have to make a page for it. Still, it's such an empty effort, it hardly seems worth the time. Still needs to be rewritten so as not to be so obviously out-of-universe. Objection withdrawn. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 22:01, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
Centuries
Can someone add the 6th and 7th century into this? --MrThermomanPreacher talk to me 22:08, October 15, 2011 (UTC)